BBI II-C #6 The Divorce and Remarriage of the LAMB
One of the most important themes which runs through the entire Bible is the Marriage of the Son of God. The Old Testament refers many times to Zion/Jerusalem & Israel as being “betrothed” to the Lord. The prophets declare her harlotry during this betrothal period, and emphasize that the Lord has divorced her for a time (as illustrated by her exile and the desolation of the Temple). Yet He promised to take her again as His wife in the coming Kingdom. The New Testament repeatedly quotes from these “re-marriage” prophecies, and applies them to the “marriage of the LAMB,” the bride being the renewed (New) Jerusalem with her inhabitants. The “New Covenant” is the second betrothal covenant made with the twelve tribes, “the house of Israel” and the “house of Judah” (as stated in Jer. 31:31-34 & Heb. 8:4-13).
Unless the “Lamb” of the “New” Betrothal Covenant was also the same “Husband” as under the “Old” Betrothal Covenant, then the Son would be guilty of incest by marrying His Father’s divorced wife, something that is an abomination to God in both Testaments. These facts require that the “Messenger of Yahweh” who appeared to Moses in the Burning Bush and on Mt. Sinai, who carried Israel in the wilderness and defeated her enemies, is the SAME PERSON as the “Lamb of God.” Therefore, the pre-human origin of the Son of God is absolutely required. He was “the Messenger of Yahweh,” the one Malachi 3:1 calls “the Messenger of the Covenant.”
9 thoughts on “BBI II-C #6 The Divorce and Remarriage of the LAMB”
Hi Tim,
Thanks for another great explanation of apostolic monotheism. Would it be reasonable to conclude then that the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in 70AD was the last act of God ‘divorcing’ the Jews? And that Jew and gentile are one wife and one city of the Lamb, as we see in Rev 22?
If so, I infer that the bible could be the complete fulfilment of prophecy for national Israel but not necessarily for the new covenant family of God. By that I mean a future judgement will fall upon the new covenant wife of Jesus Christ due to it committing the same harlotry that OT Israel committed during the last two millennia. To expunge and eradicate that sin Jesus comes again, so is Rev both for old covenant Israel (up to 70AD) and then the new covenant age (up to Jesus’s second coming)?
One of the reasons I ask is to clarify that if God only had one ‘wife’ in the OT, betrothed to YHWH through the Son, there wouldn’t be two wives in a future context, one for the Father (Israel) and one for the Son (the Gentile church), since the new covenant merged Jew and Gentile in Christ by faith. Thanks for any clarification and your time.
James,
Yes, the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 was the final act of “divorce,” as Israel rejected and crucified the Groom. As Jer. 31:31-34 indicates, the “New Covenant” was made with the house of Israel and Judah. The disciples were all part of the 12 tribes, and so participated in the “New” Covenant promised in Jer. 31:31-34, being part of Israel. Yet, according to Paul in Ephesians 2, Gentile believers are allowed to participate in the “covenants and promises” that were Israel’s by promise, including the Abrahamic Covenant, the Davidic Covenant, and the New Covenant. This was part of the “mystery” revealed through Paul. Through baptism, we become “Abraham’s Seed and heirs of the promise” (Gal. 3:26-29). While the “New Covenant” is specifically promised to Israel as a replacement for the Old Covenant, the New Covenant allows for Gentiles to be included along with Israel as co-heirs. Thus the “Bride of the Lamb” is the Holy City with its inhabitants, both Jew and Gentile.
I agree that judgement upon the Gentile part of the “espoused bride” which has played the harlot will be equally severe, as described in Revelation as “Mystery Babylon, mother of harlots.” The total destruction of Rome in Rev. 17-18 describes this. Yet, just as with the destruction of Jerusalem, there is always a faithful remnant preserved, as indicated by the “Woman clothed with the sun” in Rev. 12.
Thanks Tim for your reply. Apologies if this is slightly tangential. So in summary, would you say that there is a biblical ‘now and not yet’ that applies to all, Jew and gentile, within the new covenant marriage language that includes both salvation (sanctification and resurrection into eternal life), and a future judgement of the Babylon that is visible in that same church? I might say that Rev forewarned the 70AD events, but also forewarns the new covenant bride of events we are yet to experience.
I’m trying to align your thoughts as a challenge to amill/postmill and full preterist views that say all is fulfilled including for believers today, plus any relevance for a separate work for a secular Israel that God intends, hence the tangent. If you have other studies that you think shed light on this topic, I’d be keen to study them. Thanks again.
James,
Yes, I would agree with your first paragraph. Ultimately, there will be only ONE “wife” of the Lamb, but it will include faithful Israel as well as the Gentile “Church,” when both have been purged and made immortal. Revelation 19 states that “His wife has made herself ready,” which is brought to conclusion in the tribulation.
Sorry to continue James’ tangent, but I recently watched your video on Revelation 11:14-19, and I’m curious how the Israelites can obey the Law of Moses from their hearts (when temple worship is resumed) if the sacrifices being offered aren’t actually for the purpose of covering their sins (because Jesus already atoned for them at the cross). Could you please elaborate on that?
There’s also a point someone brought to my attention that you didn’t cover there. We’re told in Ezra that the gold & silver bowls, plates, cups, etc. were brought back from Babylon to Jerusalem, implying that the same implements were used in the first and second temple. Someone told me “Titus took those to Rome after the second destruction, as recorded on the arch of Titus. So now they’re gone, meaning there’s no possibility for a third temple because you’d need them for worship.” How would you respond to this? Do you think it’s a similar situation to the Ark of the Covenant being lost until Elijah shows up?
Karl,
The efficacy of the sacrifices is not the point, but rather the obedience of the people. The Law required absolute obedience, not that one must fully understand the theological implications of the sacrifices or festivals. As Christians, we understand the true meaning of the Feasts and their sacrifices because we have the book of Hebrews and other NT teaching. Also, there is a vast difference between individual Jews and their personal relationship with God vs. the nation of Israel collectively and its relationship with God. The events of the ‘tribulation’ in relation to Israel have to do with Israel as a collective nation of twelve tribes, and how God will use a selective group of Israelites (12k from each tribe) to fulfill His national promises. If you read Deut. 30 carefully, you will see that it can ONLY have a national fulfillment, not an individual one. God did not promise to bring back individual Israelites to the land when each as individuals are obedient to the Law. He only promised a collective deliverance in response to a national repentance and obedience.
Regarding the Temple utensils, I do not see why it is necessary to have the original ones. Obviously, the “Ark of the Covenant” is necessary. But other than that, either the utensils will be brought back or else new ones will be made.
Sorry Tim, I’m not sure I follow your answer to Karl. Would you agree that the church, consisting of Jew and gentile as one new man in Christ, is destined to be the bride of Christ post-resurrection in the millennial reign?
If so, will a primary activity of the millennial reign of Christ, wedded to resurrected believers, consist of animal sacrifices as worship at a physical temple by hereditary Jews or Jews and non-Jews together?
If so, and since you state that this is to demonstrate obedience rather than it have a sin-atoning purpose, why would the Law be reintroduced when it was impossible to keep, and so required the perfect covering sacrifice of Jesus?
Surely the sacrificial system would be as weak and fading as a means to connect with the Father in the millennium as it was to first and second temple Jews. Thanks for clarifying as I’m a confused if these are your thoughts.
James,
1. Yes, the whole “assembly” of redeemed and resurrected Jew and Gentile will be joined to Christ in restored Jerusalem at “the marriage supper of the Lamb” as the fulfillment of the “marriage” covenant, the “Bride, the Lamb’s wife.” They will then become the “kings and priests” (Rev. 20:4) for the mortal (unresurrected) population during the Millennium.
2. The Festivals with their animal sacrifices are not a form of “worship” for the immortals, although the immortal “priests” officiate the sacrifices for the mortals. The Feasts (w/animal sacrifices) serve the same function for the remaining (mortal) population as they did for Israel prior to Christ, as a teaching tool to point them to Christ (Gal. 3:24). The mortals will be required to observe them by Law under threat of punishment (Zech. 14:16-21).
3. I think you misunderstood my point regarding demonstrating “obedience.” That question concerned the time of tribulation for Israel PRIOR to the second coming and resurrection. The Law of Moses will indeed be “strengthened” for a very narrow time period (one ‘week’ of 7 years – Dan. 9:27) in order to give the 12 tribes of Israel the window of opportunity for national repentance as required by Deut. 30 and Mal. 4. The Law of Moses ENDS completely at the end of those 7 years of tribulation when the current “heavens and earth” PASS BY, as Jesus stated in Matt. 5:17-18 (NASB) 17 “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. 18 For truly I say to you, UNTIL HEAVEN AND EARTH PASS AWAY, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished.” This statement shows 2 things: (1) That the Law of Moses extends until the end of this age for national Israel, and (2) that it completely ends when everything prophesied within it is accomplished (which includes Israel’s exile and national repentance – Deut. 30). The “Millennium” has an entirely NEW “Law,” which is the “New Covenant,” which is not compatible with the Law of Moses. The “New Covenant” comprises both the “betrothal” aspect (this age) and the consummation of the marriage (the Millennium). Yes, there are many similarities with the Mosaic Covenant including most (but not all) of the Feasts, the Sabbath, etc. But the Mosaic Law required a priesthood of exclusively Israelites of the tribe of Levi. The NEW Law has both Jews and Gentiles as priests once the marriage is consummated. The Mosaic Law allowed only Israelites to worship at the Temple, while in the New Law the Temple will be a “House of prayer for all nations,” Jew and Gentile alike (Isa. 56:7; Mk. 11:17). The Mosaic Law required an annual “Day of Atonement” (Yom Kippur) with the High Priest sprinkling blood on the Ark of the Covenant. But the New Law has no such thing, and the Ark of the Covenant is replaced by the Throne of the Lord on which Jesus will sit (Jer. 3:16-17). Under the Mosaic Law Levites were the judges of the 12 tribes of Israel. Under the New Law the 12 Apostles will be the judges of the 12 tribes of Israel (Matt. 19:28).
IMO, you are making two mistakes: (1) conflating the Tribulation covenantal arrangement (which is part of the Mosaic Covenant) with the covenantal arrangement of the Millennium (New Covenant), and (2) misunderstanding the purpose of the Feasts under both the Mosaic Law and the Millennial Law. In neither covenant are the Festivals with their sacrifices effective in actually cleansing from sin. In both the purpose is an annual reminder of sin and the need for redemption through the blood Christ (Heb. 10:1-5) under the “Everlasting Covenant” (Heb. 13:20). Under the Mosaic Law they pointed Israel towards Christ. Under the Millennium Law they will point the gentile nations to Christ.
Thank you. Much appreciate your response Tim. That’s all clearer for me to understand and continue to work through.